Before Birth, Dad’s ID

Submitted by Matt on Wed, 2012-06-20 01:17

Article here. First thing they think of is to use it to get the father of the fetus to start paying for the mother's decision to have the baby. I know this is a tough issue for many of us. Point is, as long as a man has no post-conceptive reproductive rights, why should he be legally on the hook for a decision which is not his but entirely hers, yet even before the infant is born? Excerpt:

'It is an uncomfortable question that, in today’s world, is often asked by expectant mothers who had more than one male partner at the time they became pregnant. Who is the father?
...
Besides relieving anxiety, the test results might allow women to terminate a pregnancy if the preferred man is not the father — or to continue it if he is.

Men who clearly know they are the father might be more willing to support the woman financially and emotionally during the pregnancy, which some studies suggest might lead to healthier babies.

And if the tests gain legal acceptance, some lawyers say, women and state governments might one day pursue child support payments without having to wait until the birth. Under current law, “until and unless the pregnancy produces a child, any costs associated with it are regarded as the woman’s personal problem,” said Shari Motro, a law professor at the University of Richmond.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

At some point the law will need to deal with the disparity within the law. The Constitutional right given under Roe v Wade applies only to women. Men have no say in what happens. Why should men be forced into the legal obligations of parenthood when women can avoid them with ease?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Wed, 2012-06-20 02:53

another angle is that if its not a child at conception then either the mans DNA belongs to him or it doesnt

if it belongs to him (and hes responsible for it still) and the woman uses it for purposes unintended (to create a child instead of as lubricant) then its theft and he should sue her for financial compensation in the amount of child support he will pay (damages) for the damages she caused him from this theft

if a mans DNA no longer belongs to him after it leaves his body then he cant be held legally responsible for a womans conscious actions to bring a child to term using his DNA since it didnt start as a child at conception and after that point and at exactly that point there was no child (if its a child at conception then abortion is murder)its a womans own actions and choices that create a child out of that DNA and for that reason a man cannot be held responsible for the womans actions....

thots objections?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Rog on Wed, 2012-06-20 03:18

Just as long as everyone gets tested, I say go for it. When women know that there's a possibility that the less desirable guy might be the real father, then they don't want to get paternity tests anymore. If a couple of extra months of potential child support encourages them to find out the truth, then I think it's actually a slight improvement.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by dungone on Wed, 2012-06-20 08:56

rog just might be on to something here. if a woman has an egg taken from her, or she is not 'properly compensated' for its use, all he!! will follow. lawsuitcity

but once a guy let's his boys get away from him, even if stolen from the trash can or disposed of condom, he is again liable for $$$$.

also, i'm sure some guys somewhere have thought of this, but giving the 'other' guy rights to children created while married, might just cut down on adultery. now, even if a guy knows the kids ain't his, nuttin he can do about it. pay up sukka.

i would bet plenty, give odds, that if these type laws are adopted, a married woman's lover's accidental pregnancy will happen a LOT less oft than what women tell guys now. especially if she stands to lose $$$ on it.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by daveinga on Thu, 2012-06-21 01:03